drakengardfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:The Reaper
There are multiple Reapers #The games never claim that Urick's Reaper is the one Grim Reaper. He refers to it as "the land's reaper" suggesting that there are reapers in other lands. If it were The Death, he would have just said so. #It is unclear if the astral pact-patterns like the Shadow, Ifrit or the Reaper can die or pass on. However, if the rules for a pact are as consistent as they always have been up to that point, it is very likely the Reaper perished along with Urick. Anything else is conjecture. #The Official DOD2 guide describes the Specters as "having the shape of a grim reaper" implying that there are multiple. #The Reaper's Scythe is a weapon from Drakengard 1 and does not appear or get referenced to in Drakengard 2. ##Its original Japanese name is "Deadly Sickle" so it doesn't actually belong to Urick's Reaper. ##Since the weapon is from Drakengard 1, the story cannot be a reference to the Caim boss fight in Drakengard 2. ##In the end, the reaper wasn't the guardian to hell (shinigami in Japanese), it's this sickle itself. Meaning the host should be dead in DOD2. #The Reaper has a similar design to the Specters from the first and second game. With a helmet-like skull, ripped cloak and spinal cord tailing out from below. If there is a defacto death god, which is possible, Urick's Reaper isn't it. If there are any counters to these findings, please provide evidence so we can compare note. Let's have a civil discussion on this topic. DrakeVagabond (talk) 05:55, June 19, 2019 (UTC) Reasons Urick's Reaper is Death Countering your Claims 1) Firstly the whole "The Land's Reaper" could very well mean "The Land (Earths) Reaper" vs "The Lands (particular country's) Reaper" and considering Lands is a term used to describe the continent of Midgard and is not a term used in drakengard 2 I am in favor of the former term. 2) Yes while Specters do look like The Reaper I can easily say things like "some flies look like bees" or something to that affect. Just because something looks similar to another thing does not mean it is that thing. 3) As for the rules of the pact, you should know that there are two notable exceptions to the pact system seen in the games. The first being Angelus intentionally broke the pact she made with Caim in one ending and didnt die from it. The second more notable one is the gods make pacts with humans in the Nier universe to make them into members of the legion, the idea that the gods are killed when the legion cannon fodder die is absurd so clearly gods and higher beings like dragons can circumvent the rules of the pact. 4) If one analyses the scene where Urick dies, he is killed when he jumps in front of caims blade, and is clearly dead. But The Reaper clearly takes over the body for several moments and tanking multiple swings from Caim. This has never been seen before in a pact as in every other isntance, aside from the above point, when one pact partner dies, the other dies immediatly afterwards. I find that the vague wording from Urick, the fact that we have seen times in the history of pacts that can allow for a pact partner not to die, and the unique behavior from the reaper after Urick dies is proof enough for me to write "Presumably a lesser god" of some sort. Professor Evelyn (talk) 17:28, June 19, 2019 (UTC)Professor Evelyn hi so i just came on here an saw that some folks are having an issue coming to an agreement. so i looked over the privious posts and looked at the evidince presented. so i'd like to give my opinion on the matter because i just finished playing all 3 games. #on the topic of urick's reaper being "the lands reaper" i have to agree with drakevagabond. urick doesn't say if it's the grim reaper in anywhere in the game. i originally thought as much at first. but after looking at the 2 sides of evidince, i have been convinced urick's statement is too vague to conclud that he was talkin about death itself or else he would have said so. #about the designs of the reaper, the same artist worked on both games. so as far as im aware, if it's consistant with eachother its reasonable to believe that they are at least similar types of undead. though ill agree its not the strongest bit of proof. #for the rules of the pact system. i sumwhat agree with both sides. angelis did break her pact with caim in the 3rd ending. but it is unclear as to why or how she can do it. I'm not certain on the nier stuff. but there is a part in the first game where seere and golem's pact just breaks with not much explination. it is a possiblity that the reaper didn't die. but since the game doesn't say otherwise, we can't know for sure. is there other media like comics and novels that clarify what happens? #it's a decent theory. but the game doesnt directly say that's what happens. i just replayed that part and it doesn't say anything about what happens to the reaper. so if its not said anywhere that reaper survives its just a theory #if official source material is saying that reapers and specters are the same thing, then that should trump any theories based on vague wording. unless it's stated somewhere in the game that there is one reaper. #i can agree that since the weapon on this page isn't in the same game and it's directly conected to this character, it should be removed from the page. i personally can get behind the idea that the reaper is a diferent type of specter enemy, though not the exact the same thing. At the same time it does have the same powers as the spirits from drakengard 3. maybe all undead like the reaper have similar powers. you can at least put that undr trivia. but having just played through that section of the game, what's one the page right now doesn't happen on screen or is perperly explained as far as i know. i don't wanna sound like im taking a side here. but since drakevagbond have evidince and references to the game and professor evelyn only seems to have theories base on whats in the lore, im inclined to agree that this page should at least withhold adding anything other than facts. and any theories based on the lore should go in a trivia section. that way people aren't getting the wrong idea about the reaper and the theory can still be presented. i also don't like the idea that one person is holding ownership of a page that should be freely edited. we're all fans here so lets try not to insult eachother and call names. hope this helps the discussion Penmaster3000 (talk) 02:07, June 20, 2019 (UTC) In Response Thank you Penmaster3000 but you are mistaken of a few things 1) Nothing about by 4th point is a "theory" so let me break that down for you *Urick jumps in the way of caims swing - FACT *Urick falls to the ground dead - FACT *The Reaper takes over his body as seen from the ghostly aura that surrounds him - FACT *The Reaper is seen leaving his body - FACT Nothing about that was a theory. My point was that again, if the Reaper was just any old being when Urick died, which he did, then the Reaper would have died immediatly No offense the thing you presented was a theory. Your 2nd point is a complete fallacy "well because it looks alike and acts similarly it IS that thing." is not a valid argument, its nothing more than a coincidence. Also really the reaper does not look anything like drakenagrd 3 specters. Those guys have armor and everything. The Reaper had none at all. Also you mentioned not knowing much about my Nier example which makes me ask how can we take your claims seriosuly if you do not even have all the relevant information. Besides Angelus and Golemn, the gods are beings that can causally abuse the rules of a pact which is the crux of my argument here. Lastly I am only locking down the page until me and Drakevagbond reach a consensus on the matter. Before you go around saying things are theories please make sure you understand what they are saying before jumping to a conclusion. Professor Evelyn (talk) 02:23, June 20, 2019 (UTC)Professor Evelyn I don't really agree with the 4th pint either. But I think it is a mistake to interpret that moment as "leaving his body" because it screeches in pain and dissolves afterward. One can argue that Caim killed it since Urick comes back to life when it's gone and dies soon after that. Too many unique factors are at play in this scene and it's all vaguely conveyed. The artist of both games (Kimihiko Fujisaka) has been consistent with how he draws dragons, golems and other monsters between both of the games. I find it had to believe that he made the Reaper look like a Specter by accident. And of course, Drakengard 3 Specters look different from how they were originally. All the monsters do. He expresses that he wanted to give the monsters a new look since there is an eight year gap between the release of 2 and 3 (Drakengard 1 and 2 were only two years apart). My point is if the Reaper is a different creature he would have drawn it differently as he did with the other undead. A theory? maybe. But its something worth pointing out. (Also it didn't cross my mind that it could be a Spirit from Drakengard 3. Thanks for that input Penmasters3000). Even with those examples of a pact breaking, it is never stated anywhere that the Reaper does anything like that. None of it is explained or elaborated on. Like Penmaster3000 says, it's just a theory based on the expanded lore. It certainly has its place, just not as the definitive explanation. Like Michael having met Angel and Legna in the past. Or Mikhail meeting Angel in the Land of Mountains when separated from Zero. I wouldn't make it sound like that IS the case, but more so that it COULD be the case. But if official information is saying that Specters are grim reapers, then I'm not going to argue with it. My consensus is that this shouldn't be a big deal. I've been presenting official information and sources to support my additions. My conclusion is there isn't enough evidence to claim that Urick's Reaper is the one and only Grim Reaper. But there is enough to claim that it is a different type of Specter. Not exactly the same thing of course. There's nothing wrong with the idea of multiple death gods. DrakeVagabond (talk) 02:23, June 21, 2019 (UTC) I am currently unwell and I do not want a lengthy post so let me summerize this 1) Evidence, even circumstatial evidence is still evidence 2) My Evidence: *As you yourself admit, the way Urick died is unique in term sof how pacts work but what is a fact is that Urick did not die immedialtly which suggests immortality on the reapers part. Also guess what other beings have unique pacts: Dragons and Gods and The Reaper does not look like a dragon. Circumstatial Evidence. *STOP using this false equivelance fallacy. Also STOP misquoting. It was "specters are in the likeness of grim reapers" or some similar quote. not "Specters ARE grim reapers." This confirms that a Grim Reaper is a thing. Now remind me I believe Uricks pact partner is called THE REAPER, not THE SPECTER. Circumstantial Evidence *Every other Specter in the entire series, gets one shotted. The Reaper, however tanks many hits and you can't even confirm it died (if it did then as pacts go Urick shouldnt have had time to shove Caim) that is direct evidence 3) Your Evidence *A shoddy quote you continue to misquote trying to say it says Specters are Reapers. Theory also a false equivelance fallacy *Pure speculation based on irrelevant design changes, bad wording, and more speculation. 4) You are the one who came up here thinking you could just chane everything and it is YOUR job to meet the burden of proof which you have not. So I will not move from the position, especially with as weak of evidence as you have displayed. Professor Evelyn (talk)Professor Evelyn What are you even trying to say here? We don't know what a canonical death of two pact partners looks like. No "a grim reaper" not "The Grim Reaper" I'm the one who came up with that name "The Reaper" for this page when I created because I couldn't find any other information on its name. I just capitalized it and dropped "land's". This name comes from a lack of information. We can't confirm if it lived either. we don't have enough information about the Reaper in order to say either or. Also, specters go down after multiple shots depending on the levels of the dragon. And there are multiple examples of undead possessing body and making them stronger. I've reiterated several times that "they take the shape of a grim reaper" and it from an official source. Where does it say that the Reaper is a god? The weapon doesn't belong to this reaper, all times it is referred to is in lowercase and it is never explained what it is. DrakeVagabond (talk) 04:34, June 21, 2019 (UTC) I believe I said my evidence was Circumstatial. I never said in any source did it say the Reaper was a god. Also you contradicted yourself. You already confirmed Urick called it "The Lands Reaper" so "The Reaper" point I made still stands. As for canonical death of pact partners? Have you been listening. White CHlorination Syndrome, Nier, The Gods, Legion. If you do not even know the lore aroudn that you have no business being in this argument. But to summarize. In that example the god or gods make pacts en masse to create the Legion. the Legion is killed off but the gods remain. I used that as CIRCUMSTATIAL EVIDENCE. I never claimed it helped me prove the Reaper was a god was a fact, but it is evidence. Lastly, I never questioned where you got your quote, I said you like peddling a false equivelance. Which since you STILL do not know what that is, it is when you try to compare one thing to another prematurely to make those two things the same. That is what your doing. The quote says they take the form of a reaper, not that they are reapers, so my point still stands. At this point you aren't even summarizing my points correctly either since this response is not me conter attackng it is me correcting your false undersranding of my points. Stop. You still have not fulfilled your burden of proof, no matter how much you yelp the same vague, loosely related or irrelevant points it does not amount to reaching your burden. Simple as that. I mean the fact you did not know of the canon examples of pact partners dying (by the way Drakengard 2 Caim and Angelus die there, ALSO in universe every ending happens according to Accords perspective so trying to limit which pacts I use, in universe, does not even work. As i have been saying: SHODDY ARGUEMENTS Professor Evelyn (talk) 04:45, June 21, 2019 (UTC) Professor Evelyn